Last Call Review of draft-ietf-bess-orf-covering-prefixes-03
review-ietf-bess-orf-covering-prefixes-03-opsdir-lc-pignataro-2015-02-17-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-bess-orf-covering-prefixes
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2015-02-18
Requested 2015-02-04
Draft last updated 2015-02-17
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -03 by David Black (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -04 by David Black (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -03 by Brian Weis (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -03 by Carlos Pignataro (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Carlos Pignataro
State Completed
Review review-ietf-bess-orf-covering-prefixes-03-opsdir-lc-pignataro-2015-02-17
Reviewed rev. 03 (document currently at 06)
Review result Has Issues
Review completed: 2015-02-17

Review
review-ietf-bess-orf-covering-prefixes-03-opsdir-lc-pignataro-2015-02-17

Hi!

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. 

This document is on the Standards Track, and specifies a new Outbound Route Filter (ORF) called “Covering Prefixes” ORF. 

Thank you for a very well written document!

Summary: Ready with minor issues

Major:

None.

Minor:

   o  Address Family Indicator (AFI) - defined in [RFC4760]
   o  Subsequent Address Family Indicator (SAFI) - defined in [RFC4760]

I believe the “I” in AFI and SAFI is for “Identifier”, not for “Indicator”.


   When the BGP ROUTE-REFRESH message carries CP-ORF entries, the
   following conditions MUST be true:
   o  ORF Type MUST be equal to CP-ORF (65).
   o  The AFI MUST be equal to IPv4, IPv6 or L2VPN
   o  If the AFI is equal to IPv4 or IPv6, SAFI MUST be equal to MPLS-
      labeled VPN address
   o  If the AFI is equal to L2VPN, the SAFI MUST be equal to BGP EVPN
   …

What happens if the ORF Type is 65, but the AFI/SAFI do not follow this MUST?
Similarly, what if the AFI is IPv4, but the Minlen is 37. What happens? How is an operator alerted?


   If the ROUTE-REFRESH AFI is equal to IPv4:
…
   o  The value of Route Type MUST be 0 (i.e., undefined)
   If the ROUTE-REFRESH AFI is equal to L2VPN, the value of Route Type
   MUST be one of the following:
   o  1 - Ethernet Autodiscovery Route
   o  2 - MAC/IP Advertisement Route
   o  3 - Inclusive Multicast Route
   o  4 - Ethernet Segment Route

Please specify that these values are coming from draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-11 (Section 7 or Section 22).
Specifically say that this is the “EVPN Route Types” registry.
Further, the value of “0” is shown as “RESERVED”, and not as “undefined”. Does l2vpn-evpn need updating?


Nits:

‘idnits' runs totally clean, thank you!

Hope this helps.

Thanks,

-- Carlos.